Conceptual Analysis of Brand Architecture

Conceptual analysis of brand
architecture and relationships

within product categories
Received (in revised form): 4th September, 2003
RAJAGOPAL
holds a doctoral degree in marketing and is Professor of Marketing at Monterrey Tec University (ITESM) in
Mexico City. He has been associated with various national institutes including the Administrative Staff College of
India in senior academic positions and the University of Birmingham, where he conducted research and training
activities. His areas of interest include consumer behaviour, brand management and competitor analysis.
ROMULO SANCHEZ
obtained a PhD in marketing with economics from LUMS (Lancaster University Management School) in 1998. In
1999 he joined the Department of Marketing at ITESM-Campus Ciudad de Mexico. He has also worked for IESA
and Universidad Valle del Momboy in Venezuela. His areas of expertise include marketing strategy, brand
portfolio management and business to business marketing.
Abstract
Brands play a signicant role in developing marketing strategies for specic product categories in a
rm. A coherent international brand architecture is a key component of a rms overall marketing
strategy as it provides a structure to leverage strong brands into other markets, assimilate acquired
brands, and rationalise the rms branding strategy. This paper discusses how rms can develop
brand architecture, and considers the factors that contribute in shaping the architecture. The
managerial implications for marketing management and the impact of architecture on the brand
hierarchy are also analysed.
Rajagopal
Department of Marketing,
Business Division,
Monterrey Tec University,
ITESM, 222, Calle del Puente,
Tlalpan, Mexico City 14380 DF,
Mexico
E-mail: rajagopal@itesm.mx
Brand architecture may be dened as

an integrated process of brand building
through establishing brand relationships
among branding options in the competitive environment. The brand architecture of an organisation at any time
is, in large measure, a legacy of past
management decisions as well as the
competitive realities it faces in the
marketplace. The rms history creates
brand baggage. This includes strong
brands with rich traditions (like Louis
Vuitton) as well as the burden of weak
brands with strong traditions (Samsonite). Management inertia and vested
interests within the rm often create
barriers to the pruning of weak brands
or their absorption into strong brand
categories.
Brand architecture also reects the

characteristics of the product market.
Where products are strongly culturally
embedded, local or national brands are
likely to proliferate, catering for specic local preferences. On the other
hand, where customer preferences and
desired product attributes are relatively
homogeneous worldwide, and products
share common functions, there are
greater opportunities for global or
international brands at the corporate or
product divisional level.
The brand architecture helps in the
revival, rentention or merger of brands
that have low market impact and tend
to cause organisational conicts with
the strong brands of the company. This
process of brand building categorically
HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1479-1803 BRAND MANAGEMENT VOL. 11, NO. 3, 233247 FEBRUARY 2004
233
RAJAGOPAL AND SANCHEZ
determines the performance of the

brand and allows the brand manager to
choose the specic strategy position for
the brand in the market.1 The brand
architecture can be used to rejuvenate
weak or dormant brands and to
launch new brands. The architecture of
brands, however, also encompasses the
management aspects of the launched
brands in the market.
Brand architecture inevitably reects
previous management directives. In
the rst place, the rms administrative heritage and, in particular, its
organisational structure, establish the
template for its brand architecture.
Secondly, the rms international expansion strategy and notably the mode
of expansion through mergers, acquisitions or natural growth in
terms of its market share and how
brand structure evolves over time, are
the principal areas addressed by the
brand architecture process. Entry into
strategic alliances in order to broaden
the geographic scope of the rms
operations will result in a need to
build the branding strategies of the
partners. The importance of corporate
identity and the diversity of the rms
product lines and product divisions
will also impact the range and number
of brands.
This paper discusses the conceptual
issues of brand architecture and the
impact of brand architecture on the
positioning of the brand in competitive
markets. The paper has the following
objectives:
To examine the current perspectives on branding and brand architecture.
To discuss the alternative brand
structures and the underlying
drivers, ie rm characteristics,
234
product market structure and

market dynamics.
To analyse the importance of
designing a clear and effective brand
architecture and managing brands in
order to maintain a harmonious
balance within this architecture.
To emphasise the need for an annual audit of the rms brand architecture and its t with changes in
the underlying drivers, as well as an
assessment of key strategic brands
within this architecture.
REVIEW OF THE RESEARCH

There are not many studies conducted
in the area of brand architecture,
which is a recent offshoot of the
brand concept. A study conducted
by Laforet and Saundess2 revealed
three major patterns of brand architecture: corporate-dominant, productdominant and hybrid or mixed
structures.
Within corporate-dominant brand
architectures, brands have been largely
built on the basis of organisational
standing in the market, irrespective of
the product-mix strategies and related
variables that have signicant impact
on the brand performance in the
competitive environment.3
Within a product-dominant architecture, branding is done according
to the AATAR model C attributes,
awareness, trial, availability and repeat
model, and technology.
The hybrid pattern of brand architecture considers the organisational
image as well as the product pattern
factors to determine the brand-building
strategy. Such a pattern is followed by
the well-established corporate houses
with a strong brand community such as
Procter & Gamble (P&G), Unilever,
CONCEPTUAL ANALYSIS OF BRAND ARCHITECTURE AND RELATIONSHIPS WITHIN PRODUCT CATEGORIES
Braun (Germany) and Phillips (Holland).

There is, however, considerable
variation even within a given type
of structure, depending, to a large
extent, on the rms administrative
heritage and international expansion
strategy, as well as the degree of
commonality among product lines or
product businesses. In addition, these
structures are continually evolving in
response to the changing conguration
of markets or as a result of the
rms expansion strategy.4 Corporatedominant architectures tend to be the
most common among rms with a
relatively limited range of products or
product divisions, or with a clearly
dened target market, such as Shell,
Kelloggs, Nike, Benetton, and so on.
Product-dominant architectures, on the
other hand, are typically found among
rms such as Akzo Nobel with multiple national or local brands, or rms
such as P&G or Mars that have
expanded internationally by leveraging
power brands. The most common are
hybrid or mixed structures, consisting
of a mix of global corporate, regional
and national product-level brands, corporate endorsement of product brands
or different structures for different
product divisions.
Both corporate- and productdominant structures are evolving
towards hybrid structures. Firms with
corporate-dominant structures are adding brands at other levels, for
example, the house or product level, to
differentiate between product divisions. Product-dominant structures
may be described with reference
to the multiple brands that are
moving towards greater integration or
co-ordination across the markets
through corporate endorsement of
local products. These companies also

vary in the extent to which they have
a clearly articulated international brand
architecture to guide this evolution.
Some, for example, specify the
different levels at which brands are
to be used, the interrelation between brands at different levels, the
geographic scope of each brand and the
product lines on which a brand is to be
used, while others have few or no
guidelines concerning international
branding.
INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES OF
BRAND ARCHITECTURE
Another factor impacting the rms
brand architecture is the degree of
product market integration. This can
be viewed not only in terms of
whether the same customers are
present in the markets of different
countries or regions and have similar
purchasing needs and interests worldwide, but also whether the same
competitors are present in these
markets.5 Where markets are fully
integrated and the same competitors
compete in these markets worldwide,
as in aerospace, the use of global brands
helps to provide competitive differentiation on a global basis. The
integration of markets and, in
particular, the growth of regional and
global media also encourages a move
towards international brands in order to
obtain cost efciencies and reinforce
brand strength. Advances in global
communication technology and the
internationalisation of retailing further
facilitate the growth of international
branding and stimulate a shift towards
international brands. Retailing has
further facilitated and stimulated the
development of manufacturer brands.
235
As retailers move across international

borders they provide an effective
channel for international brands but, at
the same time, their power increases.
Consequently, manufacturers need to
develop strong brands with high
market shares in multiple countries in
order to obtain adequate retail space for
these brands and minimise slotting
allowances.6
A nal factor underlying the power
of international brands is increased
consumer mobility. While global media
provide passive exposure to brands,
increasing international travel and
movement of customers across national
boundaries provides active exposure to
brands in different countries.7 Awareness of the availability of an international brand and its high visibility in
multiple countries enhances its value to
consumers, and provides reassurance of
its strength and reliability. Increased
exposure to and familiarity with new
and diverse products, and the lifestyles
and cultures in which they are
embedded, also generates greater receptivity to products of foreign origin or
those perceived as international rather
than domestic.
The way in which consumers
perceive brands is a key determinant of long-term business-consumer relationships.8 The term brand
has been shown to comprise meanings
drawn from two distinct sources: rst
the brand identity as codied and
communicated by the brand originator,
and secondly the brand meanings
drawn from the users or consumer
environment.9 This division of meaning between originator and consumer
has a number of implications, not least
the potential for drift between
organisationally determined meaning
and user-perceived meaning.10 Com236
municative or rich environments such

as the internet accentuate the drift
between owner and user brand
meanings, and this increases the
importance of understanding the forms
of linkage between brand meanings.
BRAND ARCHITECTURE
The brand architecture is the organising structure of the brand portfolio that
species brand roles and the nature of relationships between brands.
The conventional strategies of brand
architecture have been developed to
reference to equity charter, leverages
and brand protability. Contemporary
theories, however, state that brand
architecture is based on the efcacy of
the attributes, derived advantages and
brand system emerging in relation to
the buying power of the customer.
The rst step in establishing a brand
equity management system is to dene
the brand equity in a document
the brand charter which provides
relevant guidelines for the marketing managers. Such a documentation
strategy requires dening the rms
view on the signicance of the equity
concept, and describing key brands in
terms of the associated products or
names and the manner by which they
have been branded and marketed.
The second step in establishing
successful brand equity management is
to integrate the results of the periodical
brand track survey. The mapping of the
market information on the critical
indicators of the key brands can also be
a guiding tool for the brand architecture and for developing the brand
value chain.11 While creating the brand
strategy, it is important to understand
that the preliminary denition of the
brand equity is not the same for
company-named brands. In cases of

company-owned brands, the brand
becomes the principal spokesperson
for the company, and often that
works as the pivot of the brand
architecture process in the domestic
and internationally segmented markets.
Jean-Noel Kapferer12 proposed the
model of hierarchy of brands in 1992
with six levels of brands including product brands, line brands and
umbrella brands. This model forms a
new development in the management
of brands and was developed with
extraordinary insight by Kapferer.13
Later, in 1996, David Aaker constructed an innovative framework for
illustrating brand systems, and characterised brand roles as drivers, endorsers
and ghter brands, and silver bullets.14
In an attempt to further improve the
concept of brand architecture, the concept of brand portfolio strategies has
been discussed. It is believed that brand
portfolio strategies will help in searching for the efcient frontier for the
brand set the boundary where brand
managers can maximise their returns
for any level of portfolio risk. The
brand portfolio is not restricted to the
brands owned by the company. The
brand portfolio, on the contrary, includes every brand that affects the
consumers decision to buy. Not every
brand the company owns should be in
the portfolio.15 It is necessary to make
such a distinction in developing the
brand architecture approach for overcoming any conicts in dening the
role and level of brands.
The following discusses a powerful
brand architecture tool, the brand
relationship spectrum, as shown in
Figure 1. It is intended to help brand
architecture strategists to employ, with
insight and subtlety, sub-brands and
endorsed brands. The categories of

brands play signicant roles in the
process of brand architecture for a
company by:
creating coherence and effectiveness
allowing brands to stretch across the
products and markets
stimulating the purchase decisions
by brand drivers
targeting market niches and benet
positioning.
Sub-brands and endorsed brands can
play a key role in creating a coherent
and effective brand architecture. The
sub-brands and endorsed brands allow brands to stretch across products
and markets, address conicting brand
strategy needs, conserve brand-building resources in part by leveraging
existing brand equity, protect brands
from being diluted by over-stretching,
and signal that an offering is new and
different.
The brand relationship spectrum, as
suggested by Figure 1, is related to the
driver role that brands play. The role of
the driver reects the degree to which
a brand drives the purchase decision
and experience of consumers on the
usage of the product. A branded house
uses a single master brand to span a set
of offerings that operate with only
descriptive sub-brands. The house-ofbrands strategy, in contrast, involves
an independent set of stand-alone
brands, each maximising the impact
on a market. The house-of-brands
strategy, however, clearly positions
brands on functional benets and to
dominate niche segments. Targeting
niche markets with functional benet
positions is the main reason for using a
house-of-brands strategy.
237
Brand architecture constituents

Brand relationship
Brand endorsement
House of brands
Independent
not connected
with mother brand
Maximising
market impact
Shadow
endorser
Different product and

market segment
Parent brand backing
Positioning on
functional benefits
Niche market
Nominal and strong

endorsements
Reassurance and
credibility from the
mother brand
Avoid incompatibilities
Breakthrough advantages
Powerful product name
Minimising channel
conflict
Associated
name
Branded house
Total brand-product mix

integrates brand performance
incorporating sub-brands
Stress on attributes
Link with mother brand
Use value linked name
Strong endorsement to
stress total business
support from the mother
brand
Auxiliary brands
Sub-brands category
Stretching of mother brand

application association
Breakthrough new names
Co-drivers
Figure 1
Brand architecture map
A shadow endorser brand is not

connected visibly to the endorsed
brand, but many consumers know
about the link. This sub-category in
the house-of-brands strategy provides
some of the advantages of having a
known organisation backing the brand,
while minimising any association contamination. The fact that the brands are
not visibly linked makes a statement
about each brand, even when the link
is discovered. It communicates that the
organisation realises that the shadowendorsed brand represents a totally
different product and market segment.
The principal attributes of the endorsed
brand may be delineated as follows:
It incorporates the shadow brands.
It generates indirect market impact
with mother brands.
238
It represents distinct product and

market segments.
Endorsed brands operate independently of the mother brands in the
market.
In the house-of-brands strategy, the
brands are independent. Endorsed
brands are still independent, but they
are also endorsed by another brand,
usually an organisational brand. An
endorsement by an established brand
provides credibility and substance to
the offering and usually plays only a
minor driver role. The token endorser
is one of the variants of the endorser
strategy. In this approach, usually a
master brand is involved in several
product-market contexts that are
substantially less prominent than the
endorsed brand. The token endorser
Table I Market impact and brand hierarchy
Constituents and attributes

Maximising market impact
Positioning on functional benefits
Niche market
Different product and market segment
Parent brand backing
Strong endorsement from mother brand
Resources and credibility from mother brand
Stress on attributes
Stretching from mother brand
Application association
Breakthrough names
Co-drivers
Independent
brand, not
connected
with mother
brand
House of
brands
Brand endorsement types
Shadow
endorser
Nominal
Strong
Associated
name
High
High
High
Average
Indirect and
low
Absent
Indirect
High
Absent
High
Occasional
Absent
Average
High
High
High
Indirect and
high
High
High
High
High
High
Occasional
Always
Low
Average
Average
High
Indirect and
low
Average
Average
High
Low
High
Occasional
Occasional
High
High
High
High
Direct and
high
High
High
High
High
High
Regular
Always
High
Average
High
High
Direct and
high
High
High
High
Average
High
Regular
Always
can be indicated by a logo such as the

GE light bulb. The role of the token
endorser is to provide some reassurance
and credibility while still allowing the
endorsed brands maximum freedom to
create their own associations. Another
endorsement variant is a linked brand
name, where a name with common
elements creates a family of brands
with an implicit or implied endorser. McDonalds, for example, has
McPotato. A linked name provides the
benets of a separate name without
having to establish a second name from
scratch and link it to a master brand.
Sub-brands are brands connected to a
mother brand and augment or modify
the associations of that mother brand.
The mother brand is the primary
frame of reference, which is stretched
by sub-brands that add attribute associations, application associations, a
signal of breakthrough newness and a
brand personality. When both the
mother brand and the sub-brand have
major driver roles, it is considered a
co-driver situation. The master brand is
Auxiliary
brands
Average
High
High
High
Direct and
high
High
High
High
Average
High
Regular
Occasional
performing more than an endorser role

for example, customers are buying
and using both Gillette and Mach3;
one does not markedly dominate the
other. In a branded-house strategy, a
master brand moves from being a
primary driver to a dominant driver
role across multiple offerings. The
sub-brand goes from having a modest
driver role to being a descriptor with
little or no driver role. Table 1 shows
the brand architecture properties at
different levels. The above attributes
of the constituents of the brand
architecture reveal that the optimum
market impact can be obtained with
independent brands. The shadow endorsement and strong endorsement of
the brands have greater impact on the
brand architecture and are determined
by the various attributes of the constituents of the brand architecture.
At one end of the spectrum, international expansion and consumer
needs for reassurance about product
quality and reliability result in a
shift towards corporate endorsement of
239
product brands. This helps to forge a

global corporate identity for the rm
and gathers its products under a global
umbrella, thus generating potential cost
savings through promotion of the
global corporate brand rather than
multiple independent product brands.
At the same time, endorsement by the
corporate brand provides reassurance
for the customer of a reliable corporate
image and enhances visibility. The
advantages of the corporate endorsement of the product brands include:
building umbrella brands
establishing global corporate identity
developing customer condence
monitoring key strategic brands
enhancing the brand value in the
new segments.
Corporate endorsement of productlevel brands is increasingly used as a
mechanism to integrate the brand
structure across country markets,
providing a unifying element across
product offerings. For example, Cadbury uses the Cadbury name on all its
confectionery products, in conjunction
with product brands such as Dairy
Milk, Whisper and so on. Equally, a
house brand is sometimes used on a
product worldwide. For example, Akzo
Nobel places the Sikkens name on all
its paint products. At the other end of
the spectrum, rising media costs,
coupled with the importance of
building high visibility and the need to
obtain cost economies, create pressures
to extend strong brands across product
lines and country borders. Increasingly,
new products and variants are launched
under existing brand names to take
advantage of the brand names strength
and consumer awareness. Mars, for
240
example, has launched an ice-cream

line as well as a soft drink under the
Mars brand name. Cadburys Milk Tray
brand has been extended to desserts,
leveraging the brands association with
creaminess. Strong international brands
often have high visibility and are prime
candidates for brand extensions, especially for entry into new and emerging
markets such as Eastern Europe or
China. In some cases, a well-known
brand name is used on a product line
which is marketed under another brand
name elsewhere. For example, Danone
uses the Danone name to market
biscuits in Eastern Europe, in order to
leverage customer familiarity with the
name. Similarly, Nestles Maggi brand,
used on sauces and seasonings, had

high recognition in Eastern Europe and
so was extended to frozen foods rather
than the Findus brand used elsewhere
in Europe.
The growing prevalence of corporate endorsement and brand extensions, coupled with a focus on building
a limited number of strong brands in
international markets, has led rms to
develop procedures to manage and
monitor key strategic brands. A key
objective is to maintain their identity
and value in international markets.
Two important aspects need to be
considered:
1. The consistency of brand positioning in different countries and across
product lines.
2. The value and/or risks of brand
extensions in international markets.
Widely different approaches have
been adopted for managing strategic
brands in international markets and
assigning custody for them. Typically these vary depending on the
organisational structure of the rm
and the desired degree of control,

and range from having no explicit custody strategy to highly
centralised tight control by corporate headquarters.
The rms with strong country management also operate in the product
markets where brands are not important
and purchase signals may have no
explicit custody strategy. Attention is
largely centred around trademark issues
and prority is given to their infringement in different markets. In cases
where product markets are becoming
more integrated and the aim is to
improve brand harmonisation across
countries, specic brand positioning
may be negotiated between corporate
headquarters and country managers.
This approach may, however, be
somewhat cumbersome where there are
multiple brands to manage. An approach that appears to be becoming
increasingly popular is to appoint a
brand champion. The brand champion
is typically given responsibility for
building and managing the brand
worldwide. This includes monitoring
the consistency of the brand positioning
in international markets, as well as
authorising use of the brand on other
products or other product businesses.
The brand champion can either be a
senior manager at corporate headquarters, a country manager or product
development group. For example, a
lead country or one with major market
share for the brand can be given
responsibility for the brand.
In examining consistency in brand
positioning in the competitive market
environment, there is often recognition
that some adjustment to local market
conditions will be needed, especially
for mature brands. Typically, it is
considered desirable that the core

positioning should be maintained, although execution may vary. The
extent to which some deviation is
permitted typically varies considerably
from company to company, and from
one product business to another. The
brand custodian is also often responsible for authorising or providing an
opinion on brand extensions. An
important issue with brand extensions
is to avoid over-extension or stretching
of the brand and dilution of its equity
and image. Criteria for sanctioning
brand extensions vary considerably
depending largely on the rms organisational structure, the diversity
of its product lines and businesses,
and management philosophy. Often, a
proposed extension has to be consistent
with the core brands positioning and
reinforce or sustain the existing brand
concept. For example, extension of a
confectionery brand to ice cream or
dessert should emphasise the same core
attributes. In many cases, proposed
extensions of strategic brands are also
required to have market potential.
Procedures for resolving conicts in
relation to brand extensions also vary
considerably depending on custodymanagement principles and the rms
organisational structure.
BRAND RELATIONSHIP
The authors proposition is that a fourquadrant matrix is the simplest way of
illustrating the types of relationship
involved, and the linkage between the
brands, which is either strong or weak.
The factor dening the linkage between the brands is the nature of the
business relationship whether it is
close or distant. The close brands are
those owned by the company and
241
High
Supervisory
Transaction
advisory
Market share
II
Interaction
Market
co-operative
interaction
III
IV
Low
Close/own brands
Distant/endorsed brands
Brand interaction
Figure 2
Business relationship matrix
the distant brands are either shadowendorsed or independent brands that

are not connected with the mother
brands.
Brand linkage is dened as the
linkage made by customers between
the brands involved. The consumers
attitudes towards brands contribute
signicantly to the brand relationship
of the products and services of the
house of brands. The relationship of
brands may be assessed within the
company or with the co-brands. Figure
2 shows the pattern of brand relationships in the business and competitive
environment. The brand linkage may
be understood as brand scale in
reference to the performance of the
brands of the own company or the
co-brands of any alliance.
The brand interaction may be
dened as the preferences and
attributes of the brands across the
categories that exist in the company or
those that are easily available in the
242
market. Transaction I is characterised

by strong brand linkage and close
business relationships. In this case
strong formal control is exerted, often
through ownership. Interaction is often
supervisory in nature. The supervisory
and advisory form of relationship (II) is
characterised by strong brand linkage
and distant business relationships. Here
control is informal and weaker than
when the business relationship is close.
Interaction is often advisory, for
example, a manufacturers provision of
a merchandising service to a retailer.
The interactive and cooperative brand
environment (quadrant III of the
matrix) may be explained in terms of
weak brand linkage and close business
relationships. In this category the
control is strong either formal or
informal but the linkage between
the brands is weak. Interaction
between the businesses is cooperative,
for example, joint management seminars and information sharing. A weak
brand linkage and distant business

relationships are shown in quadrant IV
of the matrix. In this case the control
and interaction are according to market
conditions. Such interaction tends to
be transactional, for example, sales calls
by employees of one business to
another, and alliances.
Brands inuence consumers decisions to buy in any of the ways shown
in Figure 2, or through combinations of
them, sometimes with tremendous persuasive appeal. The Marlboro brand
personality is a good example of how
a company understands and combines
the physical and emotional elements
that appeal to certain customers who
live or would love to live a certain
lifestyle. Products such as gold credit
cards, watches or prestige items help
people to express themselves to others
by demonstrating that they are different
and have achieved something. They act
as extensions of the personality, so it
really is all in the mind, and the key to
brand management and development is
a clear understanding of what benets
the customer is looking for. Ask consumers what comes to mind when they
hear the name of a big brand such as
BMW or Gucci and they will reply
with a list of attributes that go far
beyond the physical, tangible aspects
of product and delivery. If there is
one word that brings all these things
together in peoples minds, however,
it is value. Time and again, research
shows that the real driving force behind
market leadership is perceived value
not price or inherent product attributes.
So long as the customers perceive that
the brand offers superior value, good
market performance will follow, which
contributes to brand behaviour through
its features and consistency of buying.
Branded products are also successful
because people prefer them to ordinary products. In addition to the

psychological factors already mentioned, brands give consumers the
means whereby they can make choices
and judgments. Based on these experiences, customers can rely on
chosen brands to guarantee standards
of quality and service, which reduces
the risk of failure in purchasing.
Todays world is characterised by more
complex technology, and this can be
extremely confusing to the people
who are not technology minded.
Brands can play an important role here
by providing simplicity and reassurance to the uninitiated, offering a
quick, clear guide to a variety of
competitive products and helping
consumers reach better and quicker
decisions.
BRAND ARCHITECTURE THE

PRODUCT LIFE CYCLE APPROACH
The branding strategy is also developed
in accordance with the life cycle of the
products and services. Many large
companies consider different branding
strategies at different levels of the
product life cycle introduction,
growth, maturity and decline. The
companies develop the brand in the
introductory stage with the objective
of establishing the market position on
the basis of quality, price, application
and consumer preference. It is necessary to invest more in promotion of the
brand at this stage to build awareness
and create the pull effect with the
distribution channels and consumers.
Effective brand building is necessary to
introduce the product in the distribution network at the skimming price.
Figure 3 shows the product life cycle
approach to brand management, which
243
Product life cycle approach
Brand strategies
Strategy
Brand
Brand
Brand
Brand
options
development
reinforcement
reposition
redesigning
Establish
Marketing mix
Objectives
market
position
Product
Assure high
quality
Expand target
market
Secure new
market
segments
Identfy weakness
Prepare for
re-entry
Adjust
Modify weak
features
features
Pricing
Product life
cycle
Provide
Communicate
Educate on
awareness
information
new features
re-entry features
Strengthen
distribution
channel
Deliver all
Smoothen re-entry
network
Distribution
Build brand
Build
Promotion
relationship
versions
problems
Skimming or
Challenge
Use good
Reduce price to
penetration
competition
price deals
clear stocks
Introduction
Growth
Maturity
Decline
Life cycle
Figure 3
Brand management: The product life cycle approach
considers the factors of the marketing

mix. In the second stage of the product
life cycle, which emphasises growth of
the product in the given market environment, the brand needs to be
reinforced with a focus on expanding
the consumer segment. In the process,
the weaknesses of the product from the
point of view of the preferences of
consumers and distributors need to be
identied. Accordingly the strategies to
be built to provide comprehensive
information on products and services strengthen the channel relationship and competitive pricing. During
the maturity stage of the product,
repositioning of the brand is needed,
with the objective of securing new
market segments. The marketing mix
strategies for product, promotion, place
244
and price need to be developed accordingly by adjusting the product features,

improving communication, providing
comprehensive distribution and offering good price deals to the channels. At
the stage of decline, the brand needs to
be redesigned with a view to preparing
the product for re-entering the market.
The value added features of the product
need to be improved and the product
may need to be relaunched. Simultaneously, consumer awareness needs to
be generated. The distributors of the
product may need to be reorientated
towards the competitive advantages. At
the same time, efforts have to be made
to clear the stocks of the old product
well before the redesigned version of
the product is formally launched in the
market.
BRAND ARCHITECTURE AUDIT

Brand architecture is not a static
framework, but one that needs to
be monitored and modied continually. The mechanisms established
for brand custody help to ensure that
an individual brand is managed in
a consistent fashion across multiple
countries. Given the dynamic nature of
international markets, however, and the
changing competitive realities, the
structure must be reviewed, at least
annually. A brand architecture audit
should be performed to ensure compliance with established procedures and
to determine whether the structure of
the architecture should be changed.
This needs to take place on two levels.
First, the degree to which individual
strategic brands have adhered to
established guidelines needs to be
assessed. Secondly, the entire portfolio
of brands has to be examined in terms
of whether the overall brand architecture requires modication.
The compliance audit may be dened
as a bottom-up audit of the individual
brands that allows an assessment of
how well each functions as part of the
overall brand architecture of the rm.
The key steps of this phase are:
1. Collection of information that establishes how the brand has been
used in each country where it is
marketed.
2. Assessment of deviations from its
established position in the structure
and reasons for these.
3. Evaluation of the brands performance.
Deviations are particularly diagnostic.
They may suggest poor management of
the brand globally or, more importantly, fundamental changes in
the underlying market dynamics. If

the underlying market dynamics
or product market structure have
changed, then the brands position in
the overall architecture needs to be
modied accordingly. With these
preliminaries conducted, the audit
should culminate in a face-to-face
meeting of key participants, including
the brand custodian, to establish
guidelines for the coming year.
The strategic audit begins in the
second phase as a top-down audit
conducted on multiple levels. First,
logical groupings of strategic brands
need to be assessed in terms of their
compliance with established guidelines.
Once this has been accomplished,
senior management needs to evaluate
the overall structure of the international brand architecture to determine
the t with established guidelines
at different levels across multiple
countries. Again, a key factor here is
how the underlying drivers of brand
architecture have changed. In addition
to market dynamics and the product
market structure, an important consideration is how the rm itself has
evolved, particularly with respect to
acquisitions or market expansion
initiatives. If the end result of the
strategic audit is that the rms brand
architecture no longer ts underlying
drivers, steps should be taken to revise
the rms architecture so that it reects
the new realities of the marketplace.
MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS
The product markets continue to
change rapidly.16 As markets evolve,
rms need to consider how to modify
their brand architecture and look for
opportunities to reduce the number of
brands and improve efciency, as well
245
as to harmonise brand strategy across

product lines and country markets. A
focus on a limited number of strategic
brands in international markets enables
the rm to consolidate and strengthen
its position and enhance brand power.
Effective management of international
brand architecture in the light of
changing market conditions and the
rms market expansion is, however,
crucial to maintaining its position and
strengthening key strategic brands in
international markets.
The brand architecture should incorporate all the rms existing brands,
whether developed internally or acquired. It should provide a framework
for consolidation in order to reduce the
number of brands and strengthen the
role of individual brands. Brands that
are acquired need to be merged into
the existing structure, especially where
these brands occupy similar market
positions to those of existing brands.
Equally, when the same or similar
products are sold under different brand
names or have different positioning in
each market, ways to harmonise these
should be examined. Another important element of brand architecture is its
consistency relative to the number and
diversity of products and product lines
within the company. The extent to
which brand names serve to differentiate product lines needs to be determined, or alternatively, a common
identity needs to be established across
different products. Establishment of
strong and distinctive brand images for
different product lines helps to establish
their separate identities and diversify
the risk of negative associations (for
example, between food and chemicals).
Conversely, use of a common brand
name consolidates efforts and can
produce synergies.
246
The value of corporate brand endorsement across different products and

product lines, and at lower levels of the
brand hierarchy, also needs to be assessed. Use of corporate brand endorsement, either as a name identier or
logo, identies the product with the
company, and provides reassurance for
the customer. In international markets,
corporate brand endorsement acts as
an integrating force, unifying different
brand identities across national boundaries. At the same time, corporate endorsement of a highly diverse range of
product lines can result in dilution of
image. Equally, negative effects or associations can harm and have longlasting effects across multiple product
lines. Thus both aspects need to be
weighed in determining the role of
corporate brand endorsement in brand
architecture.
In the view of the authors, a strong
and associated name of the brand
endorsement would be helpful in
penetrating the new and extended
product brands in the market. The
presence of co-drivers would also
provide an added impact on the
endorsed brands where competition is
intense. Independent brands may be
able to make a high impact in niche
markets by stressing the brands attributes and advantages compared with
closely competing brands. The conceptual synthesis of work on the
dynamics of brand relationships, with
reference to new business environments, proposes a taxonomy for a
better understanding of the relationships and linkages between brands. The
internet has also been considered as an
effective medium for building brand
relationships. It will be of critical
importance for future researchers and
practitioners to understand the increas-
ingly complex variety of factors underlying and inuencing the linkages

between brands. Future work will need
to concentrate on the operational
implications of the taxonomy proposed
here. Research could be carried out to
assess brand personality using the brand
rating method to obtain quantitative
measures.
In the future, manufacturing companies may have to exercise several
options over brand sponsorship. Their
product may be launched in the market
as the brand of the manufacturer which
is also known as a national brand, a
distributor brand (as happens in the
case of edible oils, sugar, processed
grains and many products which need
repacking), or a licensed brand name.
References
(1) Aaker, D. and Keller, K. (1990) Consumer
evaluations of brand extensions, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 54, No. 1, pp. 2733.
(2) Laforet, S. and Saunders, J. (1994)
Managing brand portfolios: How the

leaders do it, Journal of Advertising Research,
September/October, pp. 6476.
(3) Ibid.
(4) Sheinin, D. (2000) The effects of
experience with brand extensions on parent
brand knowledge, Journal of Business
Research, Vol. 49, pp. 4755.
(5) Douglas, S. P. and Craig, C. S. (1996)
Global portfolio planning and market
interconnectedness, Journal of International
Marketing, Vol. 4, pp. 93110.

(6) Barwise, P. and Robertson, T. (1992)
Brand portfolios, European Management
Journal, Vol. 10, No. 3, September,
pp. 277285.
(7) Alden, D., Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M. and
Batra, R. (1999) Brand positioning through
advertising in Asia, North America and
Europe: The role of global consumer
culture, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63,
pp. 7587.
(8) Fournier, S. (1998) Consumers and their
brands: Developing relationship theory in
consumer research, Journal of Consumer
Research, Vol. 24, pp. 343373.
(9) Jevons, C. and Gabbott, M. (2000) Trust,
brand equity and brand reality in internet
business relationships: An interdisciplinary
approach, Journal of Marketing Management,
Vol. 16, No. 6, pp. 619634.
(10) de Chernatony, L. and dallOlmo Riley, F.
(1997) Brand consultants perspectives on
the concept of the brand , Marketing and
Research Today, Vol. 25, pp. 4552.
(11) Keller, K. L. (2003) Strategic Brand
Management Building, Measuring and
Managing Brand Equity, Prentice Hall, NJ,
pp. 409411.
(12) Kapferer, J.-N. (2000) Strategic Brand
Management, 2nd edn, Kogan Press,
London, UK, pp. 125140.
(13) Ibid.
(14) Aaker, D. (1996) Building Strong Brands,
The Free Press, New York, NY.
(15) Hill, S. and Lederer, C. (2001) The Innite
Asset Managing Brands to Build New
Value, Harvard Business School Press,
Boston, MA, pp. 69.
(16) Craig, C. S. and Douglas, S. P. (1996)
Responding to the challenges of global
markets: Change, complexity, competition
and conscience, Columbia Journal of World
Business, Vol. 31, pp. 618.
247

Conceptual Analysis of Brand Architecture

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Conceptual Analysis of Brand Architecture

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Conceptual analysis of brand

architecture and relationships

Brand architecture may be dened as

Brand architecture also reects the

RAJAGOPAL AND SANCHEZ

determines the performance of the

product market structure and

REVIEW OF THE RESEARCH